Trump, the NY Times, and fake news
By Jon Rappoport
---Major newspapers will, now and then, break big stories.
But then they'll walk away from them. The follow-up leads are obvious.
But no. Those leads would result in some SERIOUS revelations about
IMPORTANT PEOPLE. So forget it. It's one and done---
We're in the middle of an escalating information-war.
Trump and Sulzberger, the NY Times publisher, meet, talk, and
then launch charges at each other. Sulzberger claims Trump's attacks on
MSM could result in violence against journalists.
Like him or hate him, Trump is threatening the media monopoly as no other modern president has.
Social media are shadow-banning and censoring voices perceived as pro-Trump.
I thought I'd boil a few things down and simplify them for AG Sulzberger, the 37-year-old publisher of the Times.
He and his paper are fake for several reasons---one is, they
don't follow up on their own best stories. It's called continuing
investigation---and they don't do it. It's their duty, and they are
grossly derelict.
Two examples, both from the spring of 2015. On April 23, the
Times ran a story under the headline: "Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation
Amid Russian Uranium Deal." The piece made an excellent circumstantial
case for Hillary and Bill as key players in a criminal scheme to sell
20% of US uranium to Putin.
But...no serious follow up. No deeper investigation. No pressure on the players. Just one and done.
Ditto for a 3/15/15 Times story, "Protection Without a
Vaccine." The article details a revolutionary candidate for next-
generation vaccines---injecting synthesized genes into the body to
"protect against disease"---and thereby permanently altering the vaccine
recipient's DNA.
The story is nothing less than a revelation about a
plan---right out in the open---to do genetic engineering on billions of
humans who get vaccinated. No speculation necessary.
And again, no follow up. No deeper digging. No pressure on the vaccine researchers and their funders.
Here is the same pattern, from the Times' chief competitor,
the Washington Post (9/4/13), "When the US looked the other way on
chemical weapons"): "...The administrations of Ronald Reagan and George
H.W. Bush authorized the sale to Iraq of numerous items...including
poisonous chemicals and deadly biological viruses, such as anthrax and
bubonic plague..."
Mind-boggling. The US government, using a non-profit called
the American Type Culture Collection and the US Centers for Disease
Control (!), shipped dozens of biowarfare materials to Iraq in the
1980s.
No follow up. No further ongoing investigation. No laying open the corrupt CDC.
Here's another Post story---October 15, 2017, "The Drug
Industry's Triumph Over the DEA": "In April 2016, at the height of the
deadliest drug epidemic in U.S. history, Congress effectively stripped
the Drug Enforcement Administration of its most potent weapon against
large drug companies suspected of spilling [trafficking] prescription
[opioid] narcotics onto the nation's streets."
This piece is a blockbuster. It indicts virtually every
member of Congress, and Obama, for passing a law hamstringing
enforcement in the fight against the biggest opioid traffickers,
pharmaceutical companies. But again, no ongoing digging. No pressure on
members of Congress to repeal the 2016 law they passed, a law which
keeps the DEA from busting Pharma executives and freezing illegal opioid
shipments.
Here is where the Post could go with that story (but won't) in an ongoing way:
"So, Senator, why haven't you introduced a new bill to cancel
the damaging one you helped pass in 2016? In your home state, the
latest reports show there are at least 100,000 opioid addicts, 800 of
whom have died. Don't you want to let the DEA do its job? What are you
waiting for?"
"This is outrageous. You're accusing me of---"
"We've conducted a poll in your state. Your constituents want to know what you're doing. So tell them..."
"I'm very active."
"How? Exactly how are you active? Yesterday, we interviewed
the mayor of your home town. He's a Democrat like you. He says you've
done nothing to stem the tide. We've put together a list of
pharmaceutical money you've taken over the past ten years..."
This is why the Times and the Post and other similar mainstream outlets are fake.
Outrageously fake.
They have the resources and the reporters, but they don't follow up on the most crucial stories they cover.
They refuse. They "move on."
If they'll comment at all on this glaring dereliction of
duty, it's: "Well, we already covered that." "It's old news." "Our
readers aren't interested in that anymore." "Mounting an ongoing
investigation would cross the line into making the news instead of
reporting on it." Etc., etc.
All lies.
Mr. Sulzberger, who was handed the job publishing the NY
Times by his family, should stop worrying about the Trump effect and
just do journalism.
Of course he won't, because he's fake.
He has no intention of getting to the bottom of things in a way that would upset some very powerful apple carts.
He knows it, we know it.
And oh yes, one other thing, via Gateway Pundit: "NYT Publisher
Complains to Trump About 'Potential' Violence Against Journalists -
Ignores Over 500 Violent Attacks on Trump Supporters." "There have been
over 538 violent attacks against Trump supporters since the 2016
election season."
Is Mr. Sulzberger interested?
No comments:
Post a Comment